Oscars Academy Award Best Picture OpEd 2020

My thoughts below, yours in the comment section. 

Ford V. Ferrari 

It's fine? It's a sports movie, maybe? Maybe a movie about a nice guy who wins, also about America being the best? Hard to say what the messaging was. I wasn't impressed or unimpressed. I was not entertained. I think this is the Green Book of this year, its so bland that it becomes the defacto winner because no one will dislike it? Who knows/cares. 

The Irishman
I watched as much as I could. It was like a VERY long form vine clip about the mafia. Same looped storyline about how the mob worked... which is exactly how you think it works. Well acted. Mildly well written. Too boring. Which is different than being too long. I've watched over 300 hours of Grey's Anatomy and they have my attention still. Ok, bye. 

Jojo Rabbit
Thought I would appreciate the art of this, but dislike the movie. T'was the other way around. I liked it a lot, but wasn't as well crafted as I kept reading and hearing. It was good, my 2nd favorite. Not sure how they made Hilter a whimsical, acceptable punchline - well, I do know, they straight-up made fun of him and highlighted how idiots fell for him. Much like MAGA/KAGA idiots now. The movie is a parody. I'd be ok with this winning because I did like it and then it would reach more choir members to preach to. 

Joker
Didn't see because I hate watching gore. I like Joaquin. 

Little Women
It was nice. So dramatic. Though, a remake and nothing groundbreaking. And idk who edited it, but they didn't do their job well. 

Marriage Story
Disappointed myself for finishing this. It was impressive because it was so dialogue heavy and the leads both had strong performances. Other than that, it was not worth it. 

1917 
[Editor's note: this was listed here, in this order, which is supposedly 'alphabetical'. Ok, yes if it were titled "Nineteen seventeen" it would be in order, but as you should know: in text any number over ten should be numeric and under ten should be written out long form, so 1917 is correct... however, all numeric things go before "A" when sorting alphabetically, I know these things, the Academy doesn't. Also, this could be wrong because I'm too lazy to google, but I'm pretty sure].

1917 should win. It was a cinematography gift. Well job. Incredible story telling. Innovative. Delicate subject. A few years ago I said we shouldn't make war movies any more, but here we are. 

Once Upon A Time in Hollywood
I should have liked it more than I did. It was charming and full of beautiful people. Well acted. I like the gimmick of a movie with in a movie (though we didn't need to watch the whole feature). I often say whatever it is you've got, give people MORE. I guess I am not talking to Q. Tarantino, because this move reeked of him. I like salt on my food; this movie is over salted, warm buttered movie theater popcorn

Parasite
Did you see Gone Girl? Girl on a Train? A Simple Favor? This is that. Those are this. Interchangeable. You'll never be able to unconvince (not a word) me the only real reason this got the nod was because elites love to be pretentious with their subtitled foreign films. This is your basic psychological thriller with dark twisty turns and a dash of comedy. Don't come at me with "it had layers of international class warfare though!". So did Crazy Rich Asians and it wasn't nominated and I'd say it's on the same level. I liked both movies, they were enjoyable, but this and that aren't anything to hand an Oscar to. Shouldn't win. Might win. 

Oscar Best Pictures

After listening to all the noise I created by not watching every single movie nominated last year (regardless of film-worthiness or my actual desire), you will be happy to know: this year, I saw every single best-picture nominated movie! 

Spoiler Alert: I use the term "spoiler alert" because it is the common colloquialism. A more proper term would be "Informing Alert". Why wouldn't you want to know what you are getting into? Informing Alert: I don't like surprises much. Not only that, some of these movies are steeped in history. Things that actually happened (and some things that didn't exactly happen- I'm looking at you Selma). If you are concerned about not wanting to know something then reevaluate your stance and then read on... There will be "spoilers".

American Sniper - This hard-to-watch is now the highest grossing war movie ever. Some media acted all shocked that it had such a huge opening weekend at the box office, and I was like "Um, did you see the trailer?" It was the best trailer I have ever seen. It made me feel things: patriotic things, empathetic things. It made me consider my family, what I would do for my country, where the line should be drawn, where enemy lines should be erased. The movie was just as good as the trailer. It depicted a realness from the perspective of a warrior that was hard-to-ignore. Not only about while being deployed, but also about being home and the homeland he serves. From what I understand, it also stayed true to the story. Though tragic and tough, the story was beautifully told and taught audiences a lot. Bradley Cooper should win Best Actor for his performance. It is my Best Picture pick. It was the best overall and it was the best at what it was.

Birdman - I will say it: this movie is weird as hell. I consider myself pretty open to artistic stuff, but this was heavy handed even for me. They were able to pull it off. Crazy as it was weird. That was the point though, to take us into this world of a crazy man in a crazy back stage world. As far as the acting goes, Michael Keaton proved he was more than just Batman in the most meta way possible. He can act, but he wasn't the best. Ed Norton, who never disappoints, didn't. And if you are on my private fashion emails, you know I have an affinity for Naomi Watts. While Emma Stone somehow has tricked America into having a collective affinity for her, she seemed less annoying to me. In comparison to other films: it was the best of an art-house movie. A few years ago The Artist won, an that was weird and art-house, and terrible, and poorly done, and shouldn't have won anything. Birdman was good, and well made and maybe could win with out pissing me off. It makes me wonder if this year's dark horse Birdman (so many animals) will come out the victor? [Insert lesson on voting primaries here, and why this movie actually might win considering the others will split votes and this one could be universally liked enough to be 2nd Best with 1st Best being a 4-way tie, and Last Best being a 3-way tie.]

Boyhood - Look, this went were movies have never been. They created something really new. Well, kind of. It is like when produce came out with those cotton candy flavored grapes this summer, or when we got the grape flavored apple. Still fruit, but new. Still a movie, but new. Boyhood was a little boring, the plot wasn't wowing anybody. Though, it did give me curiosity to wonder if every persons personal tale is at least that interesting? If so, that is interesting: to consider that everyone might be mildly interesting if I cared enough to find out. Linklater will/should win for Director. 

The Grand Budapest Hotel - Here is the problem with this movie: it reeked of Wes Anderson. Wes Anderson smells good, but it is old hat. It was exceptionally entertaining. I loved it. Had this movie been the first WA movie ever made it could win. But it isn't, and it won't, and it shouldn't. 

The Imitation Game - USA won that war. Unrelated: This movie shouldn't win this Oscar. It was good, not great. Just like Britain's contributions to WW2. 

Selma - This movie was comprised of long scenes depicting MLK in private, quieter moments- with The President in the Oval Office, with his wife discussing an affair in the middle of the night, even showing his own contemplations leading to major decisions made on the front lines of the civil rights movement. Unless everyone that knew MLK kept meticulous and deeply personal journals, and/or cooperated with the filmmakers in an intimate way with the clarity of objectiveness and with out personal bias, let alone the shaded view of 50 full years in between then and now, we don't know what was actually said or thought. So, this movie is pretty much made up, around a framework of history. Selma is  wrong to voice history like this. The movie did a fine job emotionally investing the audience, it's really a shame they threw credibly to the way side. They had a responsibility to respect history and they did not. The Civil Rights movement is important to understand and telling the story of the Selma March was worthy of a film. I agree with the general sentiments of the movie. Agreeing with morals of the protagonist of a movie doesn't mean the movie was good. I did not like this movie much. When people say they really liked this movie, they might mean to say they really like civil rights or they really like MLK or the story is important. 

The Theory of Everything - It was semi-captivating, and it was semi-superbly acted by Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones. When I say semi-suberbly acted, what I mean by that is Eddie did a phenomenal job, but within external limits. He really transformed his body and his delivery was amazing. But he didn't speak for much of the film. Some say that makes it more difficult, since he can only rely on his body language/facial expressions. I say it makes it half as hard. Simplifies it and amplifies the performance he did give. Sorry, bro. This one goes to Bradley. Also, I couldn't tell if Felicity Jones is that good, or was just that well-cast. The personal story of Stephen Hawking is amazing. It is a story of genius (see below) that was able to connect to a broad audience, because really it is a story of struggle and love, and we can all relate to that. I also appreciated the cinematography, costumes, and lighting. The secondaries that help transport you to another time. Those details were spot on. 

Whiplash- I saved the worst for last. (And the list is alphabetical). In the worst of cases, people mistake abuse for love. This movie/story gets something very wrong. I've long said not all who are manic are geniuses, but all geniuses are a some degree of manic. Manic can be a symptom of genius. In Whiplash they make it seem like if you are manic the symptom could be (musical) genius. That if you really just let go of all sanity, something creative might be able to come out. No. Not how it works. This was unfortunately written by someone who is looking at genius from the outside in. Continually purporting that if the main character could just get to that level of instability, he might find this depth of drumming that he didn't even know he had! Sorry, again, no. 

True: You may have this gift of musical genius and when you tap it, sometimes the manic escapes. 
False: When you have this intense instability, sometimes the music escapes. 

When JK Simmons' character goes on a diatribe about why he is pushing his students so hard abusive, claiming it was just bred of love; he saw something in his student that he knew he had to force to come out, and that is how all successes come, from a push to be better and that if someone had said "that was nice" then nothing great would be... OMG while watching, I considered hunting down the writers phone number so I could CALL THE WRITER AND EXPLAIN GREATNESS and how it all actually works and how love really can conquer all. I am not claiming to be a genius, but I am claiming to know about behavior management. Sure, people have made strides out of spite, out of resentment turned into passion... that has happened. Every time it has happened, it is tragic. It sells the greatness short. This movie got it wrong in a major way. Which is why when I just now (after writing all I just wrote previous) looked up the writer/director... a few fun facts: his father is a writer, the teacher was inspired by his own experiences with a director, and he is a mere 30 years old. So, he might really benefit from a lesson on how greats are actually made. Maybe instead of me, his father should make that phone call. Heal some things. JK Simmons does a really good job and he or Edward Norton should win for supporting actor. At the end of this movie it seemed to start to redeem itself by showing the student in his own twisted behavior, but then threw it all away in the last five seconds. Stop glorifying this behavior, stop trying to get approval from a maniac, stop trying to explain and defend something you don't understand. This film is immature. This film did have good tempo though.